Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Strategies & Market Trends : 2026 TeoTwawKi ... 2032 Darkest Interregnum -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: gg cox who wrote (214439)	5/28/2025 1:49:12 AM
From: Maple MAGA	1 Recommendation Recommended By Mick Mørmøny Respond to of 218347

King Charles III says Canada faces unprecedented dangers as Trump threatens annexation King Charles III said Canada is facing unprecedented challenges in a world that’s never been more dangerous as he opened the Canadian Parliament on Tuesday with a speech widely viewed as a show of support in the face of annexation threats by U.S. President Donald Trump. UK’s King Charles and Queen Camilla arrive in Ottawa ahead of the opening of Parliament King Charles III and Queen Camilla greeted crowds and met with community members at Landsdowne Park in Ottawa on Monday. Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, left, speaks with King Charles ahead of the King delivering the speech from the throne in the Senate in Ottawa on Tuesday, May 27, 2025. (Chris Young/The Canadian Press via AP) By ROB GILLIES Updated 7:11 PM CST, May 27, 2025 OTTAWA, Ontario (AP) — King Charles III said Canada is facing unprecedented challenges in a world that’s never been more dangerous as he opened the Canadian Parliament on Tuesday with a speech widely viewed as a show of support in the face of annexation threats by U.S. President Donald Trump. The king is the head of state in Canada, which is a member of the Commonwealth of former colonies. Trump’s repeated suggestion that Canada become the 51st state prompted Prime Minister Mark Carney to invite Charles to give a speech from the throne outlining the Liberal government’s priorities for the new session of Parliament. “We must face reality: since the Second World War, our world has never been more dangerous and unstable. Canada is facing challenges that, in our lifetimes, are unprecedented,” Charles said in French, one of Canada’s official languages. He added that “many Canadians are feeling anxious and worried about the drastically changing world around them.” The king reaffirmed Canada’s sovereignty, saying the “True North is indeed strong and free.”

To: gg cox who wrote (214439)	6/26/2025 11:58:27 AM
From: Maple MAGA	1 Recommendation Recommended By Mick Mørmøny Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 218347

I am not 'anti-vaccine.' I support traditional vaccines like those for polio, measles, and tetanus, which went through long-term randomized clinical trials and decades of real-world follow-up before becoming routine. My skepticism is focused specifically on the COVID-19 vaccines, and it is based on facts: Emergency Use Authorization (EUA): The COVID vaccines were authorized under EUA, meaning they bypassed the normal full approval process that requires years of long-term safety and efficacy data. (FDA, December 2020). Full biological approval (for Pfizer) was only granted in August 2021, and even then, only for certain age groups. Failure to stop transmission: Early messaging promised that the vaccines would stop infection and transmission ("get vaccinated to protect others"). However, by mid-2021, real-world data showed that fully vaccinated individuals could still catch and spread COVID-19 (CDC, August 2021, outbreak in Barnstable County, Massachusetts). Rochelle Walensky, then head of the CDC, admitted vaccinated individuals carried similar viral loads as unvaccinated individuals. CDC quietly changed the definition of 'vaccine': Pre-September 2021, the CDC defined a vaccine as "a product that stimulates a person's immune system to produce immunity to a specific disease." After criticism that COVID-19 shots were not preventing infection, the CDC changed the definition to "a preparation that is used to stimulate the body's immune response against diseases." (CDC definition change documented September 1, 2021; archived at Wayback Machine.) Efficacy claims based on limited data: Pfizer’s original clinical trial reported 95% efficacy, but this number was based on relative risk reduction, not absolute risk reduction (which was less than 1%). The trials did not measure prevention of transmission at all. Pfizer executive Janine Small later admitted before the European Parliament (October 2022) that Pfizer had not even tested for transmission prevention before launching the product. Ongoing safety questions: mRNA technology had never been used widely in human vaccines before COVID-19. Adverse events (e.g., myocarditis in young males) have been acknowledged by the CDC and FDA (VAERS and V-Safe data). Given these facts, it is entirely rational, even responsible, to question a rushed and still-evolving medical product, especially when the narrative surrounding it has shifted so dramatically over time. In short: I believe in vaccines that work. I do not blindly believe in rushed products or political messaging masquerading as science. That’s called critical thinking, not craziness.